Third of US drivers may have subconscious death wish, text while driving

CDC survey finds 31 percent admit to driving while texting within last month.

Nearly a third of American drivers apparently have a death wish, based on data released this week by the Centers for Disease Control. The CDC's study is based on data collected in the US during October 2011, and the organization found that approximately one in three American drivers send or read text messages on their cell phones while driving.

This data, published in the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report this week, showed more than half of two demographic groups—women from 18 to 24, and men from 25 to 34 years of age—admitted to texting while driving within the 30 days prior to taking the survey.

Percentage of men and women who admit to making cell calls and to texting while driving, by age group.

Centers for Disease Control

The study also included a similar survey of European drivers conducted in June of 2011. By comparison, drivers in most of the countries covered by the study were much less likely to text (or at least, less likely to admit to texting) while driving. Only Portugal matched the US in texting-while-driving behavior.

A nation-by-nation breakdown of how drivers responded when asked if they text and drive.

Centers for Disease Control

It's important to remember this data came from surveys performed in the US and Europe in 2011, so they may not reflect the impact of recent anti-texting laws or other efforts in the US to curb the practice. (At the same time, it also didn't include responses from the countless people who couldn't respond due to tragic death or injury from accidents experienced while texting.)

155 Reader Comments

The same 30% texting and driving will be the ones to go wind surfing and take pictures of it.

Licenses should be suspended for a year if someone's pulled over for texting and driving, eating and driving, driving altered - any of that other stuff.

I'm in favor of barring a person who's caught texting and driving, from cell phone ownership, for a half decade. Of all of the stupid ways to die, getting hit by someone who will go to jail and hopefully have an epiphany that they were reckless dumbasses...it's one of the stupidest ways to die.

I don't own a car, so I never do it but I'm not convinced it's anywhere near as dangerous as the studies make it out to be.

On the way to work last month, an orange rolled off the passenger side car seat and made a thump when it hit the floor. I looked down at the noise and right back up once I saw what it was.

In that split second, something happened ahead and traffic stopped right in front of me and I *barely* brought the car to a stop without hitting the person in front of me or swerving into another lane.

Your eyes are on the cellphone for much longer than mine were on the orange when you text and drive.

I think you misread that CDC graph a smidge. You wrote "more than half of two demographic groups—women from 18 to 24, and men from 25 to 34 years of age—admitted to texting". But the key for the graph indicates that it's men 18-24 and women 25-34 who are above 50%.

That's not what the study shows. You could just as easily interpret the results "people text while distracted".

If, as the study says, texting leads to 23 times more accidents, and 30% of drivers text, why isn't there a 10x increase in traffic accidents? Instead, why have traffic accident statistics been steady over the long term (except for the long term decline in traffic fatalities)?

I love that you don't know how to use Google to do basic research but are not only telling the readers of Ars about the scientific method, but that driving while texting isn't dangerous.

I'm going with Poe's Law on this stuff. No way can any functioning human be this ridiculous...

Here in BC, where it's been illegal to use a phone in your car without hands-free for years but people still do it, the police are talking about trying to implement a 24-hour impound of your cell phone if you're caught.

Even though I always use hands-free on those rare occasions I make/take calls while driving, and I never text and drive, I'm not sure how I feel about that idea.

Anyhow, I wish there was a simple button on my phone similar to the "answer/decline" for incoming calls on an iPhone, that I could just hit, and it would then send a reply back saying something along the lines of "Got your message, but I'm driving and will reply back soon". No confirmation, no unlock, nothing that would be more distracting than changing the radio station, just a simple 1 click thingy, with big ass buttons.

It's not often important to send an immediate reply back with a proper response, but there are numerous times when being able to at least acknowledge the person can solve a lot of issues (girlfriends, work emergencies, etc). Not to mention it clears my mind of the distraction and temptation of wanting to deal with the text message.

Unfortunately, there's no app for the iPhone that auto-replies to text messages. They have them for Android and BB, but Apple actually blocks apps from accessing the required parts of the phone to do that. Some have suggested using Siri (if you have a 4s or 5) and I saw an app or two that provides shortcuts to pre-made replies. But those still require manual interaction.

There's also options in the Cydia store if your iPhone is jailbroken. Otherwise we're stuck until Apple adds it to iOS themselves.

I text when I drive. Safely, like I do anything else behind the wheel. Usually, it's when I'm stopped at a light.

This BS about having a death wish if you text when you drive is the most asinine thing I've read on Ars since I started reading this site 13 years ago.

Yes, the bullshit being that it's assumed that the death wish is only apparent for the driver. More times than not, the death wish is forced upon an unwilling pedestrian or an unsuspecting fellow driver.

I don't own a car, so I never do it but I'm not convinced it's anywhere near as dangerous as the studies make it out to be.

On the way to work last month, an orange rolled off the passenger side car seat and made a thump when it hit the floor. I looked down at the noise and right back up once I saw what it was.

In that split second, something happened ahead and traffic stopped right in front of me and I *barely* brought the car to a stop without hitting the person in front of me or swerving into another lane.

Your eyes are on the cellphone for much longer than mine were on the orange when you text and drive.

Reading through this thread, it occurs to me how pathetically lax licensing standards for vehicle drivers are. If you can't be bothered to take the absolutely most basic considerations when operation a machine that ways over a tonne and is moving at speeds in excess of 50km/h, you do not deserve that right.

I can't believe the number of people here that feel entitled to putting other people's safety at risk.

I text when I drive. Safely, like I do anything else behind the wheel. Usually, it's when I'm stopped at a light.

This BS about having a death wish if you text when you drive is the most asinine thing I've read on Ars since I started reading this site 13 years ago.

Yes, the bullshit being that it's assumed that the death wish is only apparent for the driver. More times than not, the death wish is forced upon an unwilling pedestrian or an unsuspecting fellow driver.

You're a danger to society.

how is he a danger if hes STOPPED at a traffic light??? that for the average light is a 3 minute stop. Sometimes more depending on traffic.

Yes, the bullshit being that it's assumed that the death wish is only apparent for the driver. More times than not, the death wish is forced upon an unwilling pedestrian or an unsuspecting fellow driver.

how is he a danger if hes STOPPED at a traffic light??? that for the average light is a 3 minute stop. Sometimes more depending on traffic.

Wow, way to take my comment out of context. I was hoping you would use your logic and realise I am talking about texting while driving, not while parked at the traffic lights. Those type of people are just annoying as all shit. When they dawdle at a traffic light, oblivious to the green light, they are the ones who create traffic jams.

What about using those breathalyzer devices to allow a car to start? People have to watch it after the first 5 minutes of driving so they can blow into it again. That's just as distracting as a cell phone; it creates a road hazard in the name of safety.

I don't own a car, so I never do it but I'm not convinced it's anywhere near as dangerous as the studies make it out to be.

On the way to work last month, an orange rolled off the passenger side car seat and made a thump when it hit the floor. I looked down at the noise and right back up once I saw what it was.

In that split second, something happened ahead and traffic stopped right in front of me and I *barely* brought the car to a stop without hitting the person in front of me or swerving into another lane.

Your eyes are on the cellphone for much longer than mine were on the orange when you text and drive.

A mate of mine once had a CD start jumping (the disk must have been scratched). He went to change the track, while he was coming up over a hill (as such, couldn't see what was on the other side). He looked back to the road and there was a car stopped on the road in front of him that he couldn't stop in time to avoid hitting.

While it was the other drivers fault (they were lost, so stopped in the middle of the road, geniuses), if he hadn't glanced away for that fraction of a second he probably would have avoided hitting them. People don't realise how far a car travels in a fraction of a second and the difference that would have made. Cars travel at 44 feet per second (at 30mph), that's roughly the same distance to actually stop from the same speed once you've stomped your foot on the brake.

Anecdote ahead: my niece's classmate was killed last year while driving the short trip to her friend's house to pick her up. Just a quick "be there in a sec" text, a curve that came up more quickly than she expected after small rise, and she pancaked the car into a tree.

So while you're going on about 'oh, its not *that* bad, people compensate': most drivers are one second away from an accident on a good day. Any distraction is enough to put them into a very dangerous situation.

I'm quite astonished by this thread. Why don't people just not text while driving? Is your girlfriend really going to break up with you because you didn't reply for half an hour because you were driving? Would she not prefer that to you crashing the car and killing a pedestrian? Nobody should expect text messages to function as a real-time communication medium.

I'm also surprised by how many people seem to be arguing against the idea that it causes a problem. It's like when regulation for the sake of safety comes up, people start arguing against it out of some kind of principle, but from what I've seen in my not quite 31 years of life so far, nobody is any good at judging how risky something is. Me included.

Let's see... someone said "drivers slow down in the snow" and someone said "drivers slow down in the rain". Not in England they don't... well, more people do in the snow but usually only after they start sliding sideways. You may now get a hint as to why light snowfall causes chaos over here.

As for the rain... nope. Almost nobody does, and they're indistinguishable from the people who drive slowly anyway who you always encounter on a long drive.

Thus I argue that there is no inherent compensation behaviour. We do it only when we have a near miss, like feeling the car slide on the road or only just brake in time due to wet road stopping distances. That reminds us, but it won't be long before we're back in the old complacent habits. It's all very well thinking it's just you in charge of your own safety and that you're a good driver (I'm sure I saw some stats arguing that more than half of all drivers think they're above average, which is kind of impossible), but your driving isn't going to stop some idiot coming through a red light and straight into the side of you. You have to be able to react to things at a moment's notice.

Heck, people still drink and drive and we've got very strict laws about that almost globally, and they've been in place for a long time. But everyone thinks it won't happen to them, they can hold their drink, they're perfectly safe...

Simple rule of driving - keep your hands on the steering wheel or the gear shifter and your eyes on the road at all times while moving. Only exception is the stereo as long as you keep your eyes on the road. If you need to use a phone/eat/drink/whatever, pull over. It's that easy.

Well, it's becoming harder and harder to get killed at all in modern cars since a long time now.

Sometimes I think the best street safety device would be a long, straight steel spike on the wheel pointing right at your breastbone and outlawing seatbelts ;-)

That's not the problem. If a fucktard wants to text and drives himself off a cliff it's his/her problem. But if I get run over by said fucktard while walking around beacause he/she lost control of the vehicle while texting, then I don't really care if modern cars are really safe to have driving accidents in.

People who text while driving should have their license retired and burned!! Never to drive again!!

Seems like every study shows that texting while driving to be significantly worse than DWI/DUI. Seems like it should have an equivalent penalty.

Please don't inadvertently mitigate the results of these studies: They have repeatedly shown that using handheld or hands-free cell phones TO TALK reduces driver performance to that of a drunk. One would assume that texting is as bad or worse, but the important thing is that any use of cell phones while driving is not a good idea. Here's an article on one study ... http://www.unews.utah.edu/old/p/062206-1.html

Merely thinking/talking about something else causes an appreciable lapse in concentration when driving. Asking for proof of this is like asking for proof that the sky is often blue. If you don't notice this you're probably not concentrating on driving most of the time.

If you're texting, you're thinking of what to say while operating a computer, and likely not looking out of the windscreen. Excuse me while I bear down on you with 2 tonnes of SUV without looking where I'm going. Idiots.

More than half of journalists may have subconscious desire to write overly dramatic headlines while summarizing.

Keep in mind that it's completely possible to read a text message while at a red light or in stop and go traffic. Also Siri and whatever Android equivalent can send SMS via voice basically hands-free, doesn't seem particularly more dangerous than talking to a passenger while driving. Not saying I'd do it in rush hour on the highway, but in stop and go traffic? Not saying any of this is safe but it's not exactly a "death wish."

E: I've probably sent like two texts while "driving" ever and rarely read them, but I also think that the current law proposals along the lines of "if you get in an accident and you had sent a text within 5 minutes of the crash you're guilty" are ridiculous.

I would not defend texting while driving. It's a bad thing. That said, I've always found it interesting that there are other activities, like eating, that are about as dangerous to do while driving, but that we don't talk about as much.

Eating seems much less common than texting or talking, at least so far as I've noticed. That's probably why it's less of a point, as well as being an older behavior.

And perhaps another differnece is that eating is less urgent. Most people are willing to put away their sandwich for a few minutes to concentrate on the road, if they feel it is necessary. But your phone? That can't under any circumstances be interrupted! Once you've started writing a text, or making a phone call, you're going to finish it, and you're typically not going to be willing to put it away for a few minutes and resume later.

Not saying I'd do it in rush hour on the highway, but in stop and go traffic? Not saying any of this is safe but it's not exactly a "death wish."

Stop and go traffic, which is where you generally encounter pedestrians or cyclists, yes? And where the constant acceleration/deceleration provides quite a lot of opportunities for accidents, hitting cars as well as... people who aren't cars.

That might not be a death wish, but it does seem ideal if you have a wish for the death of others.

When I cross the street on foot or on bike, drivers who sit and stare at their phone honestly scare the shit out of me. (And yes, I have been in a few near-accidents because of people doing this).

If you wouldn't do it in rush hour on the highway (where you can at least be sure you won't hit any "soft" targets), then I don't see why you'd do it elsewhere either.

Capitalism. Exploiting human beings until it's very bottom until they become drones themselves.

Fact one : Being a driver is hard, and you have to deal with enormous amount of stress every day, bad driver, angry people, teenagers looking to mess aroundFact two: Nothing changes. It's always the same.Fact three: The responsibility put to your shoulders is greater then most CEO's have in their life time. Being responsible for thousands of lives every day!Fact four: No possibility of progress. Really hard get to something more, to expand, once trapped in that kind of life, you are stuck there until the endFact five: Usually tight schedules, and every minute counts. You are responsible if there is a traffic jam and your ride is late. Nobody cares when you do your job right, everybody is on fire the very moment you make a single mistake. If you lose your job, there is practically nothing else to do with your life so you shut up and take it.Fact six: Thirsty in the middle of the ocean. So many people go through your bus, one of the loneliest jobs in the world. No real and friendly human interactions.Fact seven: So many hours/irregular . Usually work shifts are long, and you usually do not live near your job, meaning you lose 10 - 12 hours everyday , but sometimes during the day, sometimes during the night, sometimes the middle of the day or weekdays as well. Fact eight: Depressing environment. So many people are poor and take the bus. People from the street, drug addicts, drunks. Also driving through ugly parts of the cities, overcrowded etc. is still a part of the jobFact nine: Fear. A lot of people going on the buss may be dangerous, criminals, drug dealers or addicts that aim at the money in your cash register.Fact ten: You are disposable. At every point, anybody can learn how to drive a bus (takes time, but there is a lot of people out there), and if anything happens to you, you are done.

With all these in mind, how can anybody presume different then what the article is about. Every job needs to for human being, meaning you have to adjust it to suit all of human needs, not only to solve a certain problems for money. Those texts are usually crave for human interaction for a starving soul ti feed so it doesn't die. Human beings are real (a non animal part of us) and they can take up to a certain amount of stress and hunger for emotional needs. Once those limits are pushed, it collapses and becomes something else, deviant and something we are scared of. But then, instead of thinking about how we ruined the person, we blame them for not being able to take it, because we are short minded and we think only through the eyes of survival, and rules and regulations which are made by deviant humans, not the real ones. For some reason we tend to follow un human rules, I guess because they guarantee pure existence: Eat, sleep, have sex repeat.

This could be set up as a quasi out-of-office message. The trouble is remembering to turn it on and off.

"Siri, I'm driving." "Okay, Dave. I will tell anyone who texts that you are driving.""Siri, I'm done driving." "Dave, there were 3 text messages while you were driving.""Siri, play the texts." "I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that. Actually it's no problem, but I've been waiting for a way to work in my favorite movie line."

The GPS in my car doesn't allow interaction when moving (more than 10km/h, I think, and not at all when reversing). Using GPS and accelerometers in modern phones might be able to be used to perform a similar lockout, unless connected to a handsfree set of some kind. The Japanese model Nissan GTR takes that a step further - when in Japan it limits top speed to 180km/h unless on actual, and specific race tracks.

And make it non-circumventable. Because there are always people like this who think they know better, and don't seem to realise that it isn't just their own lives they're endangering, but those of others around them.

Dude, you really need to go back and re-read your high school science textbook. It's like you are asking me to prove God doesn't exist just because I question your evidence that he does.

I'm not claiming texting is safe. I'm claiming you have no good evidence that it's unsafe.

We have good evidence that texting is a distraction, and distractions cause accidents. So it's a reasonable hypothesis that texting leads to greater traffic accidents. On the other hand, there has been a step function increase in the amount of texting-while-driving. We'd therefore expect to see a step function increase in traffic accidents. But we don't -- we see the steady gradual decrease in accidents. Therefore, a reasonable hypothesis that drivers compensate for the distraction of texting, such as driving slower or only texting during safe periods, like at a traffic light.

The point is that there is zero scientific basis for the claim made in the title.

Really, I think I have a science textbook for third graders I can send you.

This is well known research. Texting while driving is as dangerous as driving drunk.

I looked, there is no data there about eating while driving. How does the risk of eating while driving compare to texting? We never hear about accidents caused by eating while driving because of media bias OR there's not many accidents caused by eating while driving. No way to tell which.

What about using those breathalyzer devices to allow a car to start? People have to watch it after the first 5 minutes of driving so they can blow into it again. That's just as distracting as a cell phone; it creates a road hazard in the name of safety.

Of course they don't have to watch it while driving. You're either unaware of how these things work, or you're misrepresenting how they work in order to make some kind of misguided "Mandatory action X is unsafe therefore unsafe action Y is fine too" point.

The rolling re-test works by sending some audiovisual signal when it's time for another test. This is a dashboard light and a sound: no different than the check engine light, the low gas light on your dashboard, or the "turn left" signal on your satnav.

I don't think eating and driving compares to texting. To read or, even worse, respond to texts, you -have- to take your eyes off of the road. During the brief seconds that this happens, all kinds of things can happen on the road, which you won't notice, much less respond to, until you look back up. You can eat without taking your eyes or attention off of the road. (I'm not saying your driving isn't affected--if you have one hand on a burger your steering response is not going to be so good during an accident--I'm just saying it isn't as bad as texting, or any other activitiy which takes your eyes away from what is happening ahead of you, while you hurtle down the road at up to 70mph).

Sure, eating or drinking while driving is generally way more manageable than texting, but it has the latent potential to suddenly interfere even more spectacularly with your driving - that is, if you happen to spill your drink or burger sauce on yourself.

Also, if you happen to drive a non-auto, like most of us euro trashes, holding a open bottle, a plastic cup, or a sandwich in your hand is going to affect way more your ability to fast shifting to keep the car in control in an emergency compared to a cellphone

I don't think eating and driving compares to texting. To read or, even worse, respond to texts, you -have- to take your eyes off of the road. During the brief seconds that this happens, all kinds of things can happen on the road, which you won't notice, much less respond to, until you look back up. You can eat without taking your eyes or attention off of the road. (I'm not saying your driving isn't affected--if you have one hand on a burger your steering response is not going to be so good during an accident--I'm just saying it isn't as bad as texting, or any other activitiy which takes your eyes away from what is happening ahead of you, while you hurtle down the road at up to 70mph).

Sure, eating or drinking while driving is generally way more manageable than texting, but it has the latent potential to suddenly interfere even more spectacularly with your driving - that is, if you happen to spill your drink or burger sauce on yourself.

Doubtful. Three seconds of "Aw crap, sauce!", while dangerous, is still not as intrusive or distracting as keeping your eyes and attention on your phone for a full minute or more.

Quote:

Also, if you happen to drive a non-auto, like most of us euro trashes, holding a open bottle, a plastic cup, or a sandwich in your hand is going to affect way more your ability to fast shifting to keep the car in control in an emergency compared to a cellphone

How? In an emergency you would either smash your sandwich/cup/phone on the stick, or drop it and grab the stick.

Besides, who shifts in an emergency? Wouldn't you hit the brakes and/or steer? What kind of emergency requires that you shift gear?

I looked, there is no data there about eating while driving. How does the risk of eating while driving compare to texting? We never hear about accidents caused by eating while driving because of media bias OR there's not many accidents caused by eating while driving. No way to tell which.

I know you feel incredibly clever for coming up with this correlation, but eating while driving is illegal; falls under driving without due care and attention.

As I mentioned before, cops are getting smarter about this. They've figured out that cell phone use can be turned into more serious moving violations. They're charging people under those more serious moving violations.

Funny that they all lived to report on their death-wish like behavior.

It was easier to text while driving with a physical keyboard. I could do it without looking at the screen, one handed. Now, I can't, so I don't. I'll wait until I'm stopped, and if I have to go, I'll put the phone down and wait until I'm stopped again. I do it pretty rarely, and I generally prefer to call, but I'm also older.

Kids in general don't have a fully developed frontal lobe. They can't help but respond, its the way we're wired, and the frontal lobe doesn't really finish development until the 30's or so. In the meantime, they have to keep dealing with every distraction, and their inability not to give it their attention.

And yet, most of them live through it.

23 times increase sounds huge until you look at the raw numbers. If your chance goes from 1 in 330 million to 23 in 330 million, it's had a 23 times increase, yet it means virtually nothing, realistically. Information presented in this manner is presented that way to obfuscate the reality that it's virtually meaningless. You simply need more information to make an informed decision, and that information isn't presented along with the number that is, because if you had it you wouldn't be as concerned.

I'm not faulting Ars with this. They report what they're given, even though they do sensationalize it much more than they used to. But a little critical thinking goes a long way.

I'm also pretty distrubed at the level of downvoting of a particular poster simply because he didn't agree. He's not trolling; he's actively communicating and discussing. People don't like what he has to say, so they just vote him down, and if that's the purpose of the voting system, we should dump it.

There are different types of texting and driving. Texting *while* driving at 30 or more MPH is a terrible idea. Texting while stuck at a red light is not, since you cannot cause a crash at that point. I wish a lot more people would understand that there is a difference, and not everyone behind a wheel causes concerns for other drivers.

Or you could focus on driving

At a red light? I'll super focus on sitting there doing nothing

Actually, you should be checking for the light, peripheral areas for pedestrians (who are stupid enough to pop out for a j-walk) as well as the vehicle in front and behind you.

I think nearly everyone, including those who actually do it, agree that texting while driving a moving car is a bad thing. Taking a few seconds to do it at a light? That's going to be a harder sell. Undoubtedly, there are several thing you need to be aware of before you start your car in motion again, even when the green light is saying you should be clear. However, the fact that you just sent a text doesn't prevent you from making yourself aware of the state of the intersection and your ability to proceed.

Maybe I'm biased because many of the intersections near me have 5-6 minute cycles, so there's substantial down time before you need to make yourself ready to move again. One of these long cycle lights is often in a state where East-West only permits 5 cars per cycle, and there can easily be 20 cars waiting to go through. You can spend 20 minutes there at the wrong time of day.

I looked, there is no data there about eating while driving. How does the risk of eating while driving compare to texting? We never hear about accidents caused by eating while driving because of media bias OR there's not many accidents caused by eating while driving. No way to tell which.

I know you feel incredibly clever for coming up with this correlation, but eating while driving is illegal; falls under driving without due care and attention.

As I mentioned before, cops are getting smarter about this. They've figured out that cell phone use can be turned into more serious moving violations. They're charging people under those more serious moving violations.

This is meaningless. Cops can and will pull you over whenever they want. They can manufacture a reason if they desire (note, I get this information from the police, so take it for what it's worth to you). Worrying about eating while driving because you might get pulled over for not giving due care is ridiculous. You might get pulled over because the cop deems your hair to be a distraction while driving and that you're not driving with due care, or because you swerved around a pot hole, or because you didn't get out of their way when they're speeding into work.

You can't drive considering what might irritate a cop and get you pulled over, because it's based on their whim and not really based on the law. They can enforce or ignore as they see fit (and they do). You're better off driving in a manner that's safe, regardless of what the cop thinks. At least that's effective at something.

Sad thing, that people can't control themselves and handle their phones while driving.

Sadder still, they probably know that it's dangerous, and still do it anyways. I assume this, because I did as well. "Yeah, it's dangerous, but I'm a good driver" and whatever rationalisation you find. One day, I was coming 'round a bend, bluetoothing my phone to the car, only to look up and see a backlog of cars standing quite still in front of me. Luckily there was some space, and I came to a stop a few centimeters beside the car in front of me - I would have hit it if the lane hadn't been wide enough.

And yet, the phone still calls out to me when driving ... I'd love a "do not disturb, driving" autorespond mode.

There are different types of texting and driving. Texting *while* driving at 30 or more MPH is a terrible idea. Texting while stuck at a red light is not, since you cannot cause a crash at that point. I wish a lot more people would understand that there is a difference, and not everyone behind a wheel causes concerns for other drivers.

I assume that every time the light changes from red to green and the car in front of me doesn't pull away at the same pace as the cars in the adjacent lanes do that the person is txting. At the very least this person is clearly not paying attention to their surroundings if cars next to them can pull away without being noticed. Not paying attention to your surroundings DOES cause concern for other drivers.

I disagree that txting while sitting at a stop light is not dangerous and cannot hurt someone. Even though you’re not moving you need to be aware of your surroundings because of the other fools on the road or if an emergency vehicle needs to get through. I would hate to be the guy who dies in the back of ambulance because it cannot get to the hospital because some fool is too busy txting his friends about his favorite football team.

The bottom line is that when you are the driver of a car you have the potential to fatally harm yourself and others. Anyone who doesn't take that responsibility seriously should not be allowed to drive a car. Driving a vehicle is a privilege, not a right.

And yet, the phone still calls out to me when driving ... I'd love a "do not disturb, driving" autorespond mode.

Before you turn the key and drive off, you put on your seatbelt, check your mirrors, turn on the lights, check if the gear is in neutral (for non-automatics, obviously), and check if any warning lights are on on the dash. I haven't been able to myself either, but it shouldn't be too much trouble to add "set phone on silent" to this routine, should it?